It’s been a while…
It’s been a while…
I was reviewing some of my older work recently, when I stumbled upon an image I have used from Jo Nova’s fear propaganda, The Skeptics Handbook II: Global Bullies want your money, page 11. (note it’s three years old and yet has done nothing to modify to scientific conclusions regarding anthropogenic climate change – maybe she should submit it to Nature or Science or Climate Change?):
Stupidly, I looked over the most obvious error (accuracy is, after all, not the point of her work from what I can tell). It’s a photo of Mars! The atmosphere is some 95% CO2! Hardly a good representation of a “decarbonized” planet!
Of course, she could have used a picture of the lunar landscape instead – with next no atmosphere to speak of, it would be a clear candidate for a decarbonised planet. However, being in approximately the same orbit as the earth, the problem would become, “why then is the mean surface temperature around -50oC and can fluctuate by more than 250oC?”
A whole can of worms would be open with that question!
I figure I may run a few of my favourite WFF and BaU2.0 comics as I’m sure a number of newer followers probably haven’t seen them. I wish I could work on some more as they’re a lot of fun to make, but I haven’t really had much time to think them up, let alone create them. I am, however, toying with an idea for a video presentation or two…
It has remained an irritant in the back of my mind, like a burr itching through.
Ever since I watched the documentary Jesus Camp, from time to time, I hear the mother home-teaching her son about how the change in the temperature anomaly is small.
I know it’s a familiar, if not exhausted denial claim (like the rest), but I think it bugs me so much more when I see it taught to a child. I don’t blame the mother so much – I don’t think she’s meaning to misinform, but is equally misinformed herself.
This burr however got me thinking. The temperature anomaly is not a measure of fluctuating weather, but long term climatic conditions – closer to our measure of the mean surface temperature. When you compare 2, 4, 6 and 8OC of warming against the mean surface temperature, it looks like the following;
We will pass 2OC of warming regardless, so, in all honestly, we’re looking at an increase between 20-57% increase in the mean!
Suddenly a few degrees doesn’t sound so insignificant.
I also added a rough measure of the likely mean surface temperature at the last ice age to put the graph into perspective. Think about how different that world must have been than the one we know today. Look again at the 6 and 8OC of warming and try to tell me that such worlds wouldn’t be just as different to ours. I’d prefer not to find out just how different.
Here’s a side project I’ve tinkered together over the past few day. All I can say is some people sufficiently annoy my enough to inspire random acts of, how should I put it… derangement. lol
BTW, to Andrew and fans; I won’t be entertaining any of your nonsense regarding what is little more than a practical joke. In his infinite wisdom, I encourage Andrew to “debunk” this moment of humour all he wants on one of his own threads. I don’t care to hear any of it any further. Cheers.
Recently, I picked up a minor spelling error in my employers description of my job:
It should be ‘Ozflux’. What a world of difference ‘Oxflux’ could mean…